On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 09:34:31 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <tglx <at> linutronix.de> wrote:

> On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 09:23 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > I went back to the original patch which I sent to Linus and it matches
> > > 18de5bc4c1f1f1fa5e14f354a7603bd6e9d4e3b6.  So all I can think is that there
> > > must have been something else in the tree which I tested which fixed the
> > > bug which 18de5bc4c1f1f1fa5e14f354a7603bd6e9d4e3b6 introduced.  argh.
> > > 
> > > Can you think what would cause the symptoms which I described?  
> > 
> > It seems that time is not updated. Timer interrupt not active or some
> > other odd thing. I figure out what's going on when I find a box which
> > exposes the problem.
> 
> It get's even worse. Reverting the patch breaks _my_ VAIO. 
> 
> /me cries and looks for a job which does not involve computers
> 

heh.

I've confirmed that 2.6.22-rc6+thatpatch fails, but 2.6.22-rc6 plus the
three hundred patches up to and including that patch doesn't fail.

So there's something between "origin.patch" and
"clockevents-fix-resume-logic.patch" in the 2.6.22-rc6-mm1 lineup which
fixes thatpatch, once it is applied.

So I'm doing an inverted reverse polish bisection search to find out which
patch preemptively fixes clockevents-fix-resume-logic.patch.  Try doing
that with git, suckers.

gimme twenty minutes...